SPQR on the move

Well a friend of mine and I decided to get a game in of WAB yesterday given that both of us are free due to the holiday season.  We had a Roman Civil war day when we played.  He brought his usual small century of heavily armoured veterans Legionaries as the bulk of his army whereas I have large blocks of regulars.  We are virtually about even as far as unit numbers goes concerning centuries.  We mostly use barbarian screens now a days for the rest of our point allotment, and I have a pair of scorpios that do some damage when they feel like it.  I did add a new trick to my game in that I brought Barbarian Light Calvary.  He also brought two war bands of barbarians. 

He usually does a good job routing my armies, however I was able to get more than a few shots in with my regulars and was able to end up with a minor loss this time according to my calculation.  You have no idea how much a +1 makes a difference in armour saves and hits until you play him a few times like we do.  On top of that, my light calvary did what I wanted them to which was to harass his skirmish line, and my scorpios were able to actually knock out some legionaries.  

All in all it was a good day and we both exclaimed how we missed playing each other and that we should start planning more games.  I did not take any pictures or took notes so I cannot really make a full battle report of note.  Next time I will promise to make some notes at the least. 

Eulogy of Warhammer Ancient Battle.

It is with great sadness that Games Workshop has announced that Warhammer Ancient Battles has passed into the realm of used book stores.  Warhammer Ancient Battle was originally published in 1998 as a stand alone game using most of the rules from Warhammer Fantasy Battle.  The original creators of the game was the Jervis Johnson, Rick Priestley, Michael and Allen Perry.  While very similar to Warhammer Fantasy in game mechanics it had its own flavour and made it a more enjoyable experience by using experimental rules that actually worked well for the game.  I was once told that it was sort of a pet project of the four creators.  It had no miniature support yet sold well enough to last for 14 years and only needed one new edition and a retouch in between.  Not to mention a series of supplements for the various periods that were not covered in the basic rulebook.  It was killed in an apparent car accident when the driver drove Warhammer Ancient Battles off of the cliff.  Ironically everyone else survived. 

Warhammer Ancient Battle is preceeded in death by several less than stellar game systems and several that paved the way for Warhammer Ancient Battles to become the rules that it is.  While the original creators are still alive and kicking, most of them have left Games Workshop, to lead other pursuits.  Warhammer Ancient Battle will be missed by the many fans of the game.  Most hurt will be the gamers that have been waiting on their particular supplement of choice to be created as promised.  Those who are happy with what they have should play the game with honor.  I know that I will.

SPQR in the field

Well yesterday I took my Romans out to play a game with a friend.  It has been several months since I have played WAB, and I was glad for the occasion.  I was tabled easily, but it was still good to get them out and roll some dice.  I dedided to not do a battle report mainly because I did not take any pictures of the game, and that I didn't take any notes on the play-by-play to do it justice.  I usually dont so I am not suprised.

I really wanted to take these guys out and acutally get them some action.

Here is a close-up of them. 

There is a full century that is just about done, which I plan on getting done this month at the latest.  Usually, it is in jest when I set a painting deadline, but since it is getting colder, I really do need to get the models that I have almost done, complete so that I can put varnish on them before it gets too cold where I am at.

A moment of Clarity

I had a moment of clarity over the past week.  For those who follow my blog proabably already know, but for those who don't, I am not buying as much as I used to from GW any more.  There are several reasons why this is the case.  One is the price hikes that everyone is complaining about.  I don't deny that I am curtailing my purchases for that reason.  The fact that I am not playing as much as I used to in Fantasy has definately put a damper in my purchases as well.  My personal financial situation also has limited my options as well, among other reasons. 

What I have been doing as of late is putting a lot of things on the auction block.  I have sold all of my new Bretonnians that I had, as well as most of my chaos army that I still had in boxes.  What I have been doing with the proceeds is to buy classic miniatures.  Predominately models that I have not really seen in a while if at all, but I have been buying some regular old metal Bretonnians as well.  I got them to have something to compare with other manufacturers, and also that I believe that you can never have enough variety in your Bretonnians.  So I am looking for models that fit what I have for the Bretonnians and yet still use them for WAB.  FireForge Games might do the trick for more flamboyant knights, and there are a plethora of manufacturers for a more subdued knight look. I have as of yet to make a decision as to where I want to go with them, but the magic 8 ball is saying both. 

Now I have also been picking up some Chaos models as well.  The older metal knights as well as the Marauders more specifically.  And now for the momenty that you have all been waiting for, the moment where I have what apparently Alcoholics call a "Moment of Clarity" this week (You can thank Pulp Fiction for that, especially when I have visions of Jules when I had it).  My moment of clarity is "why am I still looking for Marauders when the Viking range from a series of different maufactures should be just as good for my taiste?"  I really do see Marauders more as a Conan the Barbarian type of guys rather than the Chaos worshipers like GW is making them.  Likewise my ideas of Chaos Warriors is more of what you would see from the movie "Willow" as well rather than what you get from GW.  I guess that this is yet another way that I am drawing away from GW. 

I was not that sure about how the historical ranges would fare.  Would they have what they need, and is it really what I am looking for?  Well, I did troll through some of the various manufacturer, and found that as a matter of fact, yes I think that I can do it depending on the comparison sizes for viking ranges.  I have not found anything, but I am also looking for Atilla the Hun, or Cossack troops for variety reasons in a Chaos army.  Chaos was my only holdout for human armies that I was going to collect GW models, but with the exception of Chaos Warriors, I believe that is not going to happen as well.  If anyone has any ideas as to what would be good "Kurgan" Marauder, or Chaos Warrior models, I am all ears. 

This is not just stopping at human armies as well.  I collected characters from the Vampire Count Ranges of GW as well as some parts of elite units, mainly because they are cooler models that what GW is using now, and I really did like the bloodline idea back in the 6th.  As far as common troops I really dont have much, however Mantic Games is really catching my eye.  I need to take a look myself with these guys to see if it is what I am looking for, but I am liking what I am seeing.  Some factions that I want to or already are collecting simply have no comparison in my opinion. I really like the Elf lines from Games Workshop, and I have not seen many other lines that compare to them, along with the Orc and Goblin line.  The Chaos Warriors line may be one of them, I have simply not looked for an alternative just yet.  Reaper is another option but on average is not my style. 

I am also looking very carefully as to what is in my inventory that I really want to continue based on the looks of the range.  For instance, the new dwarves are by far a different army type than what I have here in many aspects.  I like a lot of what I have seen in the army but right now I am not sure if this exactly what I want to do with part of my dwarf army.  Despite my penchant for GW Orcs and Goblins, I may be looking for an Orc replacement that is more slimmed down and would fit the other ranges that I am looking for. I am not sure at the moment for new line of orcs, and I may look at classic ranges from GW as well to see what the differences is.  Wood Elves are another quandry for me as well.  I can either use the army currently sold which "looks" like they fit with the other Elf lines, or to collect the older line, which has a limited scope of models compared to the new models, but still looks great.  The good news is that if I dont see myself fielding a classic wood elf army, I can always play a Silvan High Elf army in the likes of Averlorn should I decide to collect the classic wood elf armies.  Clearly I am going to make a few decisions over the next month or two to see which way I am going with what is my primary army for some of the factions that I collect, and not to mention that more comparison pictures will be down the pike as well. (Oddly enough, I dont see that many people doing this for fantasy figures, however I see it all the time for historical figures.)  Either way both my wallet and my WAB armies will benefit no matter what.

Why I am not fond of Re-enactments.

A rather quick post on this topic hopefully(after finishing the article there is no way that this is a quick post, sorry guys).  I decided to comment on the topic of re-enactment gaming for a few reasons.  It explains why I like the periods that I like in WAB and other comperable game systems.  It also explains where I started in the wargaming scene as opposed to going in another direction. 

Personal Background

I was always enamoured with military history ever since I was very young.  Both my Grandfathers were in WWII.  One was at Pearl Harbor when war was imposed on us.  The other was awarded a Distinguishing Flying Cross for downing 7 zeroes in one mission.  I remember their stories even now after both are gone.  Ken Burns came out with his first documentary on the Civil War and that got me really into reading military history.  I subscribed to magazines like "Military History," and while I don't have an extensive library on some of these items, I do add to my collection from time to time when I find a few books that actually bring light to the commentary as opposed to just regurgetating what I already have.  My next item that I want to collect is the Loeb series of books like Polybus, Livy, Caesar, etc. 

Despite all of this information at my hands, I don't see myself as a "History Buff."  In my definition, a history buff can tell you every detail about what they know about in history.  However, getting the reasons why is where I see many history buffs fail.  I call myself an amature historian in that I really try to figure out the reasons why an event in history happened, and determine the cause and effects of said event.  I guess that it is the two years of AP History where I was drilled to do this is still with me.  Even then however I was very good at evaluating events and try to put them into perspective.

Since I am someone who takes pride in knowing his history, why is it that I don't want to re-enact anything in my gaming or even in real life?  Well the answers are below, and yes they do vary based on periods.

Documentation is my Bane. 

The more that I know about the period, the less that I am interested in the period.  WWII and the American Civil War (for anyone outside of the US please forgive me if I switch back to calling it The Civil War, I think it is an American thing) are the worst periods for me personally because I know so much about the periods that I really cant enjoy playing any games in these periods.  For example FOW does not interest me because everything is documentated so well during WWII that I have a hard time separating the game from history.  A little hard to explain, but my personal game gives me more setting questions than I care to ask in what is supposed to be a fun game.  The great thing about playing in the ancient or classical period is that there is little documentation that we still have compared to what we have even for say the Napelonic era of warfare.  Likewise for many parts of the Middle and Dark ages, and I just skip parts that are too detailed for me to play like from Heroditus. 

Hindsight is 20/20 so I know what worked and what didn't

On this one, I have to ask can anyone else not play a Gettysburg re-enactment without the Union Fishook?  If you can then you are a better man that me, because I have a very hard time not doing a re-enactment of Gettysburg without doing some kind of formation like that with Union Troops.  I tried that several times on a computer game to no avail.  Likewise I tried to play The Civil War in a campaign mode and got boored easy for the same reason in that I know what to do and not to do during the start of the war.  Now when I play computer games with opponants on a WWII game, I get a better game, but I do get eventually boored as well.  Also there is at times the inevibility of the game that tends to sour things as well, especially with campaigns.  If you don't have the documentation you can't have any hindsight.  That means that I am not that interested in playing in a game re-enacting Zama for instance but I have no problem in something more obscure.

Personal Attachment to the guys on the table. 

WWII is where I have the hardest time on this issue.  I have a very hard time playing a game with Easy Company of "Band of Brothers" fame in a game of FOW for instance.  I have a hard time playing a game with my Grandfathers Cruiser as well.  Span of time is a very helpful for me to separate myself with the guys on the table.  But if there is someone notable in history even back in the ancient world I still have a hard time.  I am not playing Caesar ever in my WAB games, nor am I ever playing King Leonaideus of Thermopoly fame. 

Ok, what the hell do like to play then?

I dont want to re-invent the wheel I guess and I feel that I am not being creative playing re-enactment games, which is what I see too much in the periods that I dont like.  My Roman army is a good example of what I try to look for in a game of Historical gaming.  I am working on full cohort right now for a 3K game.  I only know of one cohort that is actually noted in any historical context and they ended up in a religious book.  This means that all the other cohorts are fair game basically and I can do anything that I want to them.  Anything from the Ancient world is where I really do like to be right now.  There is where I can squirrel away to a place in history where we know generally what happened but not the details is what I really do like.  Dark Ages, and the Middle ages are also periods where I like as well for the same reason, thanks to the occasional siege that burned out the castle records, no one cares about these bumpkins, etc.  The great thing about these periods for me is that there are holes in history that I can get into and follow my own way.

On another note...

This article also explains why I like Fantasy Gaming as well, but have problems playing LOTR.  LOTR feels too much like a re-enactment game rather than a game that you can go your own path.  Don't get me wrong, there are some elements of the LOTR world that I am interested in and do fit my bill, but too much of it does seem like I am re-enacting either the movie or the book.  Either way it does not work for me. 

To reiterate from a previous post, I started playing WFB back in 1994 and one of the reasons why I was attracted to the game is that there is a lot more that is unwritten about your army than there is in the armybook.  General Fantasy Gaming allows for me to create my own world under a few constructs and general rules.  Playing non-human armies does not allow for much personal attachment for me, and there is absolutely no way that I would re-invent the wheel with this form of gaming since there is no wheel unless I made it.  When you get into something like Mighty Empires that is not with the backdrop of WFB dogma, I can really let my imagination run wild, with our own world.  Thus the reason why and where I started in gaming when I did.

Apparently, The Roman Army wasn't built in a day either

(You have no idea how hard it was to find this pic, but apparently the word "Gaul" gives me a few pics of a half naked Lady along with everything else that you would expect.  Sometimes you need to just laugh at the internet)

Well since I really don't play much WFB anymore,(please see my previous post Here ) I have migrated to both 40K and to Warhammer Ancient Battle.  Specifically Early Imperial Romans is what I am putting together right now with a Gallic mercenary contingent.  Even though I have over 2K worth of an army according to WAB rules, I know right now that this army will be a lot larger over the years.  I dont plan to be as into 40K as I would be with WAB, but I will leave that to a post of its own.  Now I don't think that I will have much trouble finding any opponants for 40K, but Warhammer Ancient Battle can be tricky to find opponants from what I gather. 

A "Roman Toga Party" it is not around here. 

The good news is that I do have a few good friends and veterans of WFB who want to start playing, or already are playing as well.  I guess that the problem that I am experiencing is finding the variety in play.  The only guy with an army ready to play is another Roman army, and the rest either are taking their time putting together their army or are in a completely different period.  Now I have no problem playing the Roman Civil Wars but the guy that playes the other Roman army guy has an army that is rather booring.  What he fields is basically Wargames Factory plastic Romans and a few Celtic slingers, not exactly what I call a varied army.  We have not played in a few months so he may have made a few additions, but I doubt it.  I guess that I will offer to lend him for the game a few of my units that would give him some variety.  He is usually a good guy so I doubt that I would be overstepping my bounds if I do that. 


The newbies that are assembling their armies will be barbarian armies, so I am definately looking forward to playing them, but I have also not talked with them for a while so I have no idea where they are at.  I only have less than 1000 pts. of Celtic and the vast majority are still being assembled.  Even assembled I dont think that it would be exactly what I would use as say an introductory army just yet.  I think that it needs a few units for it to be more viable, and something that I would offer to play anyways as Romans seem more forgiving.  Given the penchant for disenchantment with WFB, I would not be suprised if I will be playing a few introductory games with people over time so I should be prepared I guess. 


I have as of yet tried to play out of period.  I have no problems with doing that, however I have only gotten a few games in with the new edition so I want to get some experience of how my army works with different armies in their own period let alone in another period.  I can see a few periods that I actually want to try with my Romans and see how they work out.  I want to try the Parthians from the Byzantium book with them, as well as the Shieldwall book with them.  "Hanibal and the Punic Wars" is another period that I think can have a few interesting interperiod games that I want to, but not with the current Romans that I have exactly. 

The thing with WAB that is a double edged sword for me is the variety in the periods.  I am a kid in a candy store with WAB.  I have no idea exactly which project that I want to do next, but most likely I will be making my celtic contingent into an actual celtic army.  Since I just have the generic Celtics from Warlord Games, I have no idea exactly what I want to do with them.  It seems to me that the sky is the limit as far as the projects that I would be interested in doing.  I guess that should be expected once you break out of the paracholism that is Games Workshop.